특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(보복폭행등)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. (1) As to the charge of assaulting the victim C among the facts charged in this case of mistake of facts, the defendant's assaulting the victim C was conducted by the police station due to the victim's report by the victim C, with the aim of fluoring the victim C, and the purpose of retaliation. However, the court below determined that the defendant was not such purpose. Such judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.
(2) The sentence of imprisonment (ten months of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too uneased and unreasonable.
B. The sentence imposed by the Defendant by the lower court is too unreasonable.
2. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts
A. The summary of the facts charged as to retaliation assault against the victim C in relation to the criminal case of the defendant, the defendant assaulted the victim C as stated in paragraph (1) of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below, with a view to retaliationing the reported or stated by the victim C
B. In light of social norms, the lower court determined that the Defendant reported the Defendant to the police on August 2013 on the ground that the victim C was not fully paid KRW 20,000,000,000 to a police officer for the purpose of carrying out a police officer, and was investigated as a crime of assault by assaulting the victim before the police dispatched by the Defendant, and that on September 7, 2013, the Defendant used the victim C as stated in Article 5-9(2) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes at the time of the instant intimidation, considering the following circumstances, even if it was recognized that the Defendant used the victim C to “as such,” as stated in Article 5-9(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, at the time of the instant intimidation, it is difficult to view that the Defendant had “the purpose of retaliation for the provision of a criminal investigation report, such as accusation, statement, testimony, testimony, or submission of materials” in relation